On the Evils of Religion

The title of this post will probably send some some people into apoplectic shock, however, be assured that I have not turned into some raving apostate who declares we would all be better off if we were atheists. No - what got me thinking about this was something I saw when looking at a blog profile. Under religious beliefs, the individual had written "Hate religion. Love Jesus." I have to confess that my first impression was that it seemed far too much like something I would see on a bumper sticker. But, it got me thinking, and asking the question ; What is religion, anyway? and, Why would someone who loves Jesus hate it?

First, what is religion? I remember being taught that religion is what man tries to do for God. In contrast, salvation is what God has done for man. Not a bad definition, but not great either. I would add to it that religion is also something men do in order to control others. But what are the evils of religion?

• it leads people away from Christ and His work for them. My brother likes to say that religion is all about getting people on the "sin-management plan." The emphasis becomes behavior modification, not loving God and worshipping Him.
• It deceives the unbeliever about the true nature of Christianity. Time and time again I have run into people who have been turned off by what they think is the gospel but what in actuality is a false gospel, i.e. religion. They have been told that what they must do is straighten up, fly right, toe the line, or get sent to hell.
• it tends to seek the transformation of the world using worldly methods such as political activism, etc. If you begin with a false gospel which preaches "make sure that you are anti-abortion, anti gay marriage, a conservative Republican, a lover of war, that you don't drink, or smoke, or indulge in anything that feels too good, then you're a good Christian" then it seems logical I suppose to try to pass laws and force (control) people to be anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, conservative Republicans, lovers of war, non - drinkers, non-smokers, etc. Then they'll be christians too !!! won't they...?

I had some other things to say, but it seems like I can't get Matthew 11:28 out of my head. Jesus says:

Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.

Could it be that Jesus was talking not just about total dependence on Him for salvation, but also freedom from the burdens of religion?

The Christian Cannot Set The World Right

Okay, the title of this post has been unabashedly stolen from a tract by J.N.Darby. I've been thinking about this idea of Christians "setting the world right" lately, probably because here in the United States, we are in an election year. I have always been a little fascinated by the obsession that American Christians have with politics. Just listen to Christian radio for a little while and you'll see what I mean. This year I have been somewhat amused at the pouting and foot stomping of several evangelical leaders over the prospect of John McCain being the Republican nominee for president. The one that really stands out is James Dobson. He's basically throwing a temper tantrum over it that could put my autistic nephew to shame. Mr Dobson is basically saying that he wants to take his ball and go home. (Is it just me or has Mr Dobson been slowly approaching the deep end as he gets older?) But I digress. The question is - what do Christians hope to accomplish by being involved in the political process? This is what brings me to JND's tract. First of all Darby reminds us that the World system is sinful and in rebellion against God. The powers that be are ordained of God - and we should therefore respect their authority, but we should not expect righteousness from anyone except the One at God's right hand - Christ. To quote Darby -

My business is to walk as a Christian, and shew the
character of Christ, not to set the world right; when
Christ comes He will do that ... If I could only set myself
and other Christians right that would be the thing.

The real crux of JND's argument is seen in another quote:

If I am to set the world right I must join with the world
and can't have any principles but theirs ... If he joins with
and infidel he owns infidelity can set the world right.

In other words, if a Christian seeks to become involved in the political process, he is taking on a fundamentally worldly endeavour, using worldly principles to advance "christian" values. Scripture is pretty clear, I think, that Jesus' kingdom is not of this world. Oh, Jesus will reign over the physical creation in the future, but that time is not yet. (Although ultimately God is always sovereign, of course).

I am somewhat exasperated with all of the Christians out there who seem bent on forcing everyone to own and obey the ten commandments, for example. What do they think they will accomplish? The law, while good, is powerless to produce godly behavior. (see Romans 7 and 8). I'll hang in there with what God says through Paul "I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for IT IS THE POWER OF GOD UNTO SALVATION to everone who believeth, to the Jew first, and also to the Greek." It is only the gospel that transforms individuals, not "better laws", or electing Republicans to office.

Update - Bible reading

Well, it has been a long time since I've written anything on this blog. I suspect nobody reads or checks on it anymore!
I thought I'd give an update on my Bible reading project. In an earlier post I had mentioned that I had a goal of reading through the Bible in six months. Along with some friends of mine we decided to go with a translation that was a little off the beaten path (for us). So we chose the New Living Translation (NLT). First of all, the actual Bible reading has gone very well. In about another two weeks or so, I will have read through the entire Bible. For me this will actually mark the first time I have actually systematically done this. I do have some random thoughts that emerge from reading through the scriptures : First, I recently read through the four gospels. One of the things that I always enjoy about the gospels is that the Lord Jesus is right there, i.e. the text is directly telling us what He did and said while here on earth. Of course the whole Bible is ultimately about Him, but in the gospels you are faced with the truth of who He is directly. Another thing that leaped out at me as I read through the Bible is the faithfulness of God. Especially all the passages in the OT where He reitirates that He will fulfill all of the promises that He made to Israel. Time and time again I was reminded that God has not cast away His ancient people whom He foreknew. I was also reminded that its all about the goodness of God, not the goodness of human beings. In other words, God will keep His promises to Israel because He is good, not because they are. My reading through the Bible convinced me that Israel still has a place in the plans and purposes of God. What that is exactly is a discussion for another post.
Lastly, some thoughts on using the NLT for my Bible reading. It was eminently readable, which is a positive when you are trying to read through the whole Bible. Overall I was satisfied with the accuracy of the translation insofar as it put across the main teaching of the Bible in what I considered to be an orthodox way. I suppose I am well enough grounded in my faith not to be overly concerned with some inadequately translated passages. But that does bring me to a couple of criticisms; namely, in its attempt to be a contemporary translation, the NLT can be too familiar. It lacks a certain depth or majesty of language that I feel scripture has. (Of course, my thoughts on this point probably arise from the fact that I have read the KJV for most of my life, and that I prefer reading the Bible in what is essentially, Elizabethan English.) Also, some passages with which I have been familiar with for many years seemed to me to be translated inaccurately. I suppose this irritated me when I read them. However, I most certainly am not a "KJV only" proponent. The NLT I believe is fine for reading, probably not so great for more in depth study.
As a final thought - the reading of scripture should not be done as simply an exercise or task to be completed, but to encounter the living God through His inspired word...

Creation, Evolution, and the hypocrisy of James Watson

It always has amazed me how otherwise intelligent people don't seem to realize that evolution leads directly to, and is totally consistent with, racism. This issue goes both ways, too - I personally know Christians who reject evolution, supposedly believing all human beings are made in God's image, and embrace racist ideas toward African Americans, for example. This is complete foolishness. But I'm running ahead of myself here. It recently was reported via several news outlets that the renowned molecular biologist/geneticist, James Watson, has gotten himself into hot water over remarks he recently made about the intelligence of blacks. One of his quotes was : "(I am) inherently gloomy about the prospect for Africa because all of our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours - whereas all of our testing says not really..." For those who might not know who Mr. Watson is, he shared the 1962 Nobel prize with the late Francis Crick for their work on the structure of the DNA molecule. He is a committed atheistic materialist who believes (and has said so on numerous occasions) that human beings are nothing more than their genes - which he believes determines every single thing about us. For someone like Mr. Watson, racism is logical. After all, if we are all here simply as the result of completely random, mechanistic processes which happen in a completely material, uncaring, meaningless universe, with no Creator, why shouldn't there be races which have evolved to be superior than others ? And why should we condemn racism ? If no God exists, no real basis for right or wrong exist either. How could anyone say then that racism is wrong ? The problem with these staunch believers in atheistic evolution is that they can't live in the real universe and be consistent with their own beliefs. The reason for this is simple: In the beginning GOD created the heavens and the earth. To try to live as though this isn't true is to live a lie constantly. James Watson is a hypocrite beyond belief. When confronted with the public outcry over his statements he backtracked furiously. He stated that: "I cannot understand how I could have said what I am quoted as having said." But Mr. Watson, I understand how all too well - you are an atheist, an evolutionist, and as a result, a racist. Mr. Watson later said that he does not believe that there is any scientific reason to believe that Africa is genetically inferior. In this he contradicts himself and once again reinforces his hypocrisy.
Why am I not a racist? Simple - I believe that God has created humanity in His image, after His likeness. I don't believe in evolution. Human beings of any origin ethnically trace their lineage ultimately back to Adam. It is ridiculous for a Christian who believes that God is the Creator, to embrace racist ideology. But there is an even deeper issue here. Reality only makes sense and is only consistent with the truth of God as revealed in the scripture. It is God's word that accurately describes the world.

Why Are We Here ?

It seems that in recent years there has been an attempt on the part of Christian leaders and writers to define what the goal of being a Christian should be. Hence books with titles like The Purpose Driven Life, for example. I believe many of these writers do mean well, and they at least are insightful enough to see that American Christians are spiritually ill, very ill. However, I always get a little bit anxious when someone comes along with a new plan or method designed to revitalize the Church, and I get even more uncomfortable when the word relevance begins to pop up. So, why are we here ? Well, some believers say that we are here to take dominion over this world and bring it into submission to Christ. This idea is popular with the more militant because it gives an opportunity for believers to join the CAUSE. It also, unfortunately, leads to attempts to politicise the Church, i.e., Christians need to allign themselves with a particular political party, etc. But I always have this nagging feeling that such an outlook becomes a dangerous distraction; and I seem to recall someone important say that His Kingdom is not of this world, I believe it was Jesus who said so, remember Him?
Then there are those that believe that our main goal must be the evangelism of the lost. I respect these believers much more because they can at least show me scripture like the great commission, for example. But my question is - is that why we are here? Ultimately, while evangelism is important (and we are commanded to do it) it ought to flow out of something greater; namely the contemplation and worship of the Lord Jesus. Why are we here - simply to bring glory to, and to worship The Lord. A.P. Gibbs called it the Christian's highest occupation. It seems that we have a tendency to want to rush out and do a bunch of things for God; when God wants our hearts, our affections, our love, our worship. Show me someone who is in love with the Lord and who can't get enough of spending time with Him, and I'll show you someone who in all likelihood will be living a godly life and sharing the gospel with others. Its really not that complicated.

Daily Bible Reading

Right now, my wife and I are reading through the Bible, on a schedule to complete it in six months. We are currently in week number three. Along with another couple (our accountability partners, if you will), we decided to read through a different Bible translation every six months. To start off with, we are reading the New Living Translation. So far I have read all of Genesis, all of Job (we are doing a chronological schedule), and the first 15 chapters of Exodus. (I'm also running a little behind, but I'll catch up.) My thoughts on the NLT, so far - pretty happy with it, especially for straight reading of the Bible. Its a bit of a cross between an actual translation and a paraphrase, but as long as the reader knows this going in, I really don't have a problem with it. For study purposes I would always reference a more literal translation like the KJV or NASB, for example. As I read more of the Bible in this translation over the next few months, I'll let everyone know how I liked it.

How a Rush Concert Honors God

On Saturday, August 24, my wife and I attended the Rush concert here in St. Louis. Once again, this Canadian power trio put on a fine show, highlighted (at least to me) by the playing of a lot of new material from their current album Snakes and Arrows. Every time I see them play, I am struck by their abundant musical gifts and genius. I sometimes think to myself, "I wish they were Christians who honored God with their music." For those who don't know the band, or much about them, Rush has been around for over 30 years, as a progressive rock band characterized by vituoso musicianship, complex musical signatures, and philosophical subject matter. The band's drummer, Neil Peart, is also their main lyricist. Neil is an agnostic, if not an atheist. His views do come out in several songs. But the more I thought about it, the more I realized that God still ultimately gets the glory whenever human beings produce creations of beauty, whether they acknowledge God or not. Or to put it another way, who ultimately gave rush the ability to play music so well? GOD DID! Just because they don't acknowledge that doesn't mean it isn't true. But, they are missing out on the very purpose of their existence - to bring glory to God. It makes me think about the words of Eric Liddell, in the film Chariots of Fire. He stated "God made me for a purpose, to go to China. But He also made me fast. And when I run, I feel His pleasure..." That's the great paradox, if you will. When we become more concerned with God's glory than with our own, we put ourselves in a place where we also receive true, pure, pleasure in the knowledge of pleasing Him.